After a television station reported incorrectly Tuesday night that Democratic State Treasurer Beth Pearce owns a home in Massachusetts, the Pearce campaign accused her opponent of propagating the story and “pandering to people’s fears and spreading rumors.”
In return, the campaign of her Republican opponent, Rutland City Treasurer Wendy Wilton (pictured), fired back with a statement questioning Pearce’s “personal commitment” to Vermont’s school property tax system because, as a renter, Pearce does not directly pay the tax.
Wilton’s campaign took the dig a step further in a follow-up email to Seven Days, appearing to question the incumbent treasurer’s commitment to the state. Pearce moved to Vermont from Massachusetts a decade ago to take a job as deputy state treasurer and was appointed to the top job in January 2011.
“If you’re fully committed to Vermont, don’t you invest in the state you love? Not if you’re heading back to MA when your tour of duty is over…” Wilton spokesman Bradford Broyles wrote.
The drama began Tuesday night during WCAX-TV’s 6 p.m. newscast. In a side-by-side profile piece of the two candidates, WCAX’s Keith McGilvery reported that Pearce rents a home in Barre and owns a home in Massachusetts, which is not true. Asked by McGilvery whether she planned to buy a home in Vermont, Pearce said in the piece, “That is a personal choice. We’re trying to think things through, but bottom line is Vermont is my home.”
(Pictured at left: Pearce)
The Pearce campaign immediately called WCAX to request a correction, and the station ran a retraction of that portion of the story at the end of the same broadcast. An online version of the story does not include mention of a Massachusetts home, nor of a correction to the piece.
“We just got it wrong,” WCAX news director Anson Tebbetts said Wednesday morning. “We hate making mistakes, but we got it wrong and we corrected it and we did it immediately.”
Tebbetts said he hasn’t yet determined precisely what led to the station’s error, but he said he plans to find out.
“We thought it was confirmed and asked, but maybe it wasn’t asked,” he said. “I think it lies on us that we thought it was a fact that we’d researched and confirmed, but it turns out it wasn’t.”
Roughly an hour after the broadcast, the Pearce campaign issued a statement on its Facebook page noting the error and blaming it on the Wilton campaign.
“This false information has been propagated by our opponent,” it read. “Beth is a Vermont resident dedicated to protecting Vermont’s bottom line. Please tell our opponent that pandering to people’s fears and spreading rumors does nothing to improve Vermont’s finances. We need honest debate. Vermonters deserve better.”
Pearce’s campaign took the accusation a step further in a press release it issued Wednesday morning, writing, “For weeks, Wilton has falsely claimed that Treasurer Pearce owns a home in Massachusetts, knowing that she does not.”
Wilton’s campaign disputed that assertion.
“Our campaign has never said anything about Beth owning a home in Massachusetts,” Broyles said. “Beth’s campaign is going nuclear about how we’re spreading that.”
Asked for proof that Wilton is behind the rumor, Pearce campaign manager Ryan Emerson cited reports from several supporters who claimed to have received a polling phone call a month ago asking questions about Pearce’s residency and home ownership. Emerson says he’s convinced that poll was conducted by the Wilton campaign.
“We do know it was her poll,” Emerson said. “There was not another poll in the field that weekend.”
While Broyles confirmed that the Wilton campaign ran a poll last month, he said he was unaware whether it asked about Pearce’s home ownership. He said the poll was conducted before he was brought on board the campaign, and said he’d only seen its top-line results.
Furthermore, he argued, “There’s a big difference between asking a question in a poll — and I’m not confirming that question has been asked — and having a message come from a campaign with a statement publicly or even privately about an issue.”
Pearce’s campaign also took issue with WCAX’s handling of the issue.
“It is disconcerting that a news organization would not fact-check a source,” Emerson said. “And if the source is from a political campaign, that’s even more frustrating.”
Emerson said he thinks WCAX should go beyond its initial on-air correction.
“I hope they would repeat one more time tonight that they had a misleading assertion in one of their stories and that State Treasurer Beth Pearce is a Vermont resident, has been for over 10 years and chooses to rent in Vermont.”
While the Wilton campaign has not publicly addressed the false assertion that Pearce owns a home in Massachusetts, it used the WCAX broadcast as a springboard Tuesday night for its own attack. In a statement it released late in evening, it criticized Pearce for choosing to rent.
“Pearce’s public admission that she does not own a home in Vermont brings into question her personal commitment for the progressive nature of Vermont’s statewide school property tax system,” Wilton’s statement said. “Pearce has been able to consistently avoid paying her fair, income based, share toward educating our children since moving to Vermont.”
In the follow-up email Broyles sent Seven Days, the Wilton spokesman said, “There is nothing wrong with Pearce renting. However… it is unusual for someone of Pearce’s stature and financial ability to rent.”
Pearce’s campaign took exception to that notion.
“My response to that is it’s absolutely childish and absurd,” Emerson said. “I wish the Wilton campaign would focus on the issues… rather than go to negative, divisive campaign tactics.”
That his boss rents a home is a personal financial decision, Emerson argued.
“She chooses to rent because of fiscal prudence,” he said.
Disclosure: WCAX and Seven Days are media partners.
File photo of Pearce by Jeb Wallace-Brodeur
Photo of Wilton courtesy of the Wendy Wilton campaign
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
I fail to see how not purchasing a home in a buyers market is “fiscal prudence”…it seems rather stupid to basically flush cash down the drain on rent. If a candidate can’t commit to her adopted state how can I see that she’s earned my trust as treasurer? I think 10 years is enough to “think things through”…you are either here and committed or you are here, waiting for a new opportunity to present itself. In the job as treasurer, that “grass is always greener” mentality does not set well by me..get off the fence, lady.
“Chooses to rent because of fiscal prudence” says Emerson. So the hundreds of thousands of Vermont homeowners and property tax payers aren’t prudent Mr. Emerson? I think this deserves follow-up…
Suggesting that those who rent should be disqualified from politics is illogical, pointless and there’s nothing contained in our state or federal constitutions that merits such an outrageous attack. Ms. Wilton’s campaign appears hell bent on reminding renters in Vermont just how much disdain she and her party’s Presidential candidate holds for the 47%.
“Suggesting that those who rent should be disqualified from politics is illogical”
Well I don’t know if I go so far as that. It seems to me to be perfectly logical to exclude them from voting on say school budgets, or tow/city bonds. To do so in essence is skewing taxation representation. Those that are not taxed dilute the representation of those that are.
Well who pays Beth’s property tax? Beth because the landlord simply passes it on as they should because anyone that eats the tax themselves will not be in business very long. This should not be an issue, and Wendy better hope she has no connection to it because it could cost her my vote because if she is connected it makes it an issue.
Sorry, but that’s absurd. As a former renter, I can tell you my rent went up everytime property taxes went up. I guarantee you the man who owned the place didn’t pay the property tax all by himself and only charge his tenants for other costs.
Landlords pay taxes. It is encumbered in rent. If taxes go up, generally rent does.
Property taxes go up every year, surely your rent does not. Mine did not go up yearly but once I bought a house my taxes did. Further I have never any of my friends say their rent went up 200-400 / year and yet my property taxes did.
Moreover, renters share that increase between multiple units, homeowners do not get that opportunity. There is no direct link, and it just plain isn’t the same.
you aren’t voting for Wendy anyways either way
Rent isn’t a magic number pulled out of the air – it’s a number that covers costs of the mortgage, taxes and profit. So not only are you paying property taxes for the property you are living in, you are paying toward an individual or corporations’ taxable income. The VT renter’s rebate form filed with your taxes assures that the landlord is claiming that income and that you the renter are passing along that portion of your income to another party.
Property taxes do not go up every year, at least not anywhere I’ve lived. And you realize that your hypothetical $200 annual increase amounts to something like $15 a month? You bet my monthly rent, in a four-apartment house, went up $15 to $50 virtually every year.
To say that renters don’t pay property tax is absurd.
I stay fiscally prudent by making my own coffee every morning, rather than buying it at a cafe. That saves money. Everyone has their own ways and means of staying fiscally prudent, a way of life that is essential for financial success. You, Mr. Broyles, should stop causing divisiveness and respect Ms. Pearce’s methods.
Ms. Wilton should ditch the Boyle on her butt
Well we clearly have lived in different areas. My property taxes have increase every single year, every year. Mainly the education tax, but the city tax as well.
Renter’s do pay property tax as part of their rent, however not all of them see the yearly increase, nor are they connected to it. They do not get a tax bill and they do not see how their vote affected that bill. In some cases yes, in many cases no.
And I hope you asked your landlord a copy for the tax bill to verify the increase. An extra $50 / month is a $2400 increase / year for a 4 apartment building.
I’m not sure exactly what your point is. My point was they are disconnected from how their vote causes property taxes to increase. I apologize if that wasn’t clear.
My point has two parts. First – renters are not always migratory and feel the increase in taxes just as homeowners and property owners do (I’ve been both and felt them equally). Second – in addition to the portion of mortgage and taxes renters pay, they also generate income for Landlords. With that income local companies like property managers, cleaning businesses and construction crews are hired to support renters. Renting has become an important part of the economic landscape and tax base in Vermont.
Rental property is taxed at a higher rate than owner occupied property. Renters certainly pay their share through their rent.